alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**OFFICE OF**  **THE ATTORNEY**  **GENERAL OF**  **TEXAS AUSTIN** 



### X-ble C. C. Beatm county Auditor !lQntaguo

cunty #OlmguO, 'Peras

One or tvo of the CawA9.88Mn8r8 vont to kmcaww

money fmm bank8 end btdioldcu11stn their roupeativs **Praoiaotr** 

### and not fzm the CountyDopocltwy bsnk which i8 not in their ~l'OOinct,to whloh eation the dspositcry beak protests. Cur o~urts hnve unlfca'rdy hold that OCP.Klt~~8, bOing cmponent 2arta of the State, have nc pWer8 w duties =Oept thosse vhich WQ **oleo~ly** sat f'otih mad defined in tho Ccnstitutlon

### non.

c. 0. Benton, Page 

### 2

**and statutes**  **aud** 

### that the **rtatutw hare**  olsrrly defined the pavers, ?re8OPib6d the dUtle8, aad -08@d the lirbilitlO8 Of **thsc;~is81~~8 ’** **Carrts,~#(ed~uat~O~h** 

### vhiohthediiier**ot countlee**  **aat, and**  **fX ’** **Of0** the8e **8tatUte8 mu8t**  **OOm8** 

### ~11 th. authority VOSt#d 10 OOUIitie8e 

### It 18 it wth sr th a l r ta b lla hed **1W &this**  

### %8t@tbstC~88lOIlRl'8'COWt8 8P@ OOWt8 Of lh**ltod** jUPi8df&i~, itat?.Utth8%FpaWW8 l19 OKIlythoseaxpm881~ cr implledly oaafwmdugorrthea~ lav,thati8,bJ th.Conrtltutloa aad 8tcrtUtQ8Of thr st8te. (w TO%. m., 8.0. 36, 

### 37, 

### pp. 363-565,

and the 

### l



### uthoritlea

there oltod) We haveboonunable

to findany Constitutional m **statutory** 

### prov:sion

wblahdIzeotly

Op tplgliedly **UUthOPh.8** l 

### Ccmafssionar~'

Courtto boawow

~103~~ for the oounty

irocl :k depository 

### or 

### irOi8

snyb8snll,

**per8cmD** 

### ?inr, ~OrpOr8ti~, or 

### am**soclatioa vbltover,**  **other than**  **by tho**  **i88uaItOe and**  **8sl.a of**  

### bond8 in 

### acoordonoe

vith oonatltutlonol

and **rtatutcry** 

### requlxmrnts. Yopblg t&t 

### Vh8t **Ye** 

### bbV0 88ld **88ti8f~OtOl ’**  **i~ WW8**  

### your question,

we are
SHANDS JACKSONVILLE MEDICAL CENTER, INC., d/b/a UF Health Jacksonville, Appellant, v. State of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH; and Orange Park Medical Center, Inc., d/b/a Orange Park Medical Center, Appellees.

No. 1D17-2215

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

November 30, 2018

Seann M. Frazier and Marc Ito of Parker Hudson Rainer & Dobbs, LLP, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

William Dean Hall, III, Marc W. Dunbar, and Daniel R. Russell of Jones Walker LLP, Tallahassee, for Appellee Department of Health.

Stephen A. Ecenia, J. Stephen Menton, and Gabriel F. V. Warren of Rutledge Ecenia, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellee Orange Park Medical Center.

Per Curiam.

*648Shands Jacksonville Medical Center, Inc., appeals from the order approving the provisional trauma center application of Orange Park Medical Center, Inc., asserting three issues: (a) that the need for the new trauma center may not be deferred until the final selection phase of the process; (b) that the Department of Health was operating pursuant to an unadopted rule; and (c) that the Department erred in allowing the new trauma center to begin its operations prior to the completion of Shands' administrative challenge. As to issue (a), we affirm based on *State, Dep't of Health v. Bayfront HMA Med. Ctr., LLC* , 236 So.3d 466 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018). As to issue (b), we affirm based on *State,**Dep't of Health v. Shands Jacksonville Medical Center* , No. 1D17-1713, --- So.3d ----, 2018 WL 5915402 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov. 13, 2018). As to issue (c), we conclude that the matter is moot.

AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.

Wetherell, Makar, and Winsor, JJ., concur.
Adrian LYTLE, Appellant, v. MAGIC BURGER and Charter Oak Fire Insurance Co., Appellees.

No. 1D18-0563

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 3, 2019

David E. Mallen of Dan Newlin & Partners, Orlando, and Richard W. Ervin, III, of Fox & Loquasto, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Kevin S. Murphy of Quintairos, Prieto, Wood & Boyer, P.A., Orlando, for Appellees.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

Rowe, Ray, and Osterhaus, JJ., concur.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Earthquakes

link

link

### Latest Earthquakes

### Latest Earthquakes

View the latest earthquake events and information from the past 24 hours, 7 days, or 1 month.

Earthquake Hazards Program

Search the Earthquake Catalog

Earthquake data and products

Earthquake science

Earthquake FAQs

Filters

              - science_science(3)
              - products_maps(2)
              - products_publications(14)
              - products_web_tools(1)
              - multimedia_image(4)
              - multimedia_image-141771(3)
              - multimedia_image-141772(1)
              - multimedia_video(1)
              - multimedia_video-149195(1)
              - documents_file(1)
              - documents_file-149220(1)
              - news_news-149245(1)
              - (-)news_news-149246(1)
              - news_news-149248(4)
              - news_news-149250(1)
              - connect_locations(1)
              - connect_staff_profiles(49)
              - other_basic-37(1)
              - other_basic-42(25)

## By Location

              - alaska(2)
              - california(2)
              - (-)colorado(1)
              - florida(1)
              - new york(1)
              - puerto rico(1)

## By Year

link

link

### Latest Earthquakes

### Latest Earthquakes

View the latest earthquake events and information from the past 24 hours, 7 days, or 1 month.

Earthquake Hazards Program

Search the Earthquake Catalog

Earthquake data and products

Earthquake science

Earthquake FAQs

Science Snippet        February 23, 2023        Volcanic explosion penetrates both upper atmosphere and upper crust around the globe
STATE of Florida, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Dean Edward MCKEE, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-4593

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

December 31, 2018

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

Pursuant to the notice of voluntary dismissal filed herein, this appeal is dismissed.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Earth

Filters

              - science_education(87)
              - science_faqs(12)
              - science_science(562)
              - products_data(327)
              - products_maps(82)
              - products_publications(3046)
              - products_software(11)
              - products_web_tools(36)
              - multimedia_audio(224)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(213)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(11)
              - multimedia_before_after(30)
              - multimedia_image(1326)
              - multimedia_image-141769(111)
              - multimedia_image-141770(16)
              - multimedia_image-141771(734)
              - multimedia_image-141772(18)
              - multimedia_image-141774(7)
              - multimedia_image-141775(141)
              - multimedia_image-141776(81)
              - (-)multimedia_image-141783(2)
              - multimedia_image-204460(215)
              - multimedia_image-207195(1)
              - multimedia_slideshow(21)
              - multimedia_video(600)
              - multimedia_video-149194(179)
              - multimedia_video-149195(233)
              - multimedia_video-149196(42)
              - multimedia_video-149197(65)
              - multimedia_video-149198(46)
              - multimedia_video-149225(4)
              - multimedia_webcam(1)
              - multimedia_webcam-141785(1)
              - documents_file(1062)
              - documents_file-149203(2)
              - documents_file-149204(8)
              - documents_file-149206(2)
              - (-)documents_file-149208(2)
              - documents_file-149209(1)
              - documents_file-149210(2)
              - documents_file-149213(4)
              - documents_file-149214(19)
              - documents_file-149215(1)
              - documents_file-149216(1)
              - documents_file-149217(2)
              - documents_file-149218(4)
              - documents_file-149219(1)
              - documents_file-149220(17)
              - documents_file-149222(990)
              - documents_file-149224(6)
              - news_news-149245(47)
              - news_news-149246(9)
              - news_news-149247(1)
              - news_news-149248(41)
              - news_news-149249(19)
              - news_news-149250(44)
              - news_newsletters(26)
              - news_other_news(287)
              - connect_locations(2)
              - connect_social_media(8)
              - connect_staff_profiles(159)
              - other_basic-37(19)
              - other_basic-42(245)
              - other_basic-43(1)

## By Location

## By Year

Partner Logo        May 1, 2023        Graphic element for the 50th anniversary celebration of USGS Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center

Instructions        March 27, 2019        How to construct 7 paper models that describe faulting of the Earth

Instructions        May 8, 2018        EROS map

Partner Logo        June 6, 2023        GeoSTAC Logo
CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002   I, Kevin Bales, Chief Financial Officer of Radius Gold Inc. (the Company) do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:  1. This Amended Annual Report on Form 20-F/A of the Company for the period ended December 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  2. The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.   Date:    June 27, 2012   /s/ Kevin Bales ____________________ Kevin Bales, Chief Financial Officer
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

					NO. 2-03-036-CR

CLARENCE HOWARD              						APPELLANT

	V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

	----------

	FROM COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT NO. 5 OF TARRANT COUNTY

	----------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

	----------

	We have considered the “Appellant’s Motion To Dismiss Appeal.”  The motion complies with rule 42.2(a) of the rules of appellate procedure. Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a).  No decision of this court having been delivered before we received this motion, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See id.; Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f). 

								PER CURIAM

PANEL D:	LIVINGSTON, DAUPHINOT, and HOLMAN JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: August 14, 2003
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, David F. Hofstatter, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of CallWave Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2005, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of CallWave Inc.



|                  |  |              |  |                                            
|----------------- |  | ------------ |  | -------------------------------------------
|Date: May 6, 2005 |  | By:          |  | /s/ David F. Hofstatter                    
|                  |  | Name: Title: |  | David F. Hofstatter Chief Executive Officer
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed

August 13 , 2019.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14- 19 -00614- CV

IN RE JASON CALLICOT TE , Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 269th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2019-29563



### MEMORANDUM OPINION
On August 7, 2019, relator Jason Callicotte filed a petition for writ of
mandamus in this Court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221; see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this Court to compel the Honorable Marilyn2

Burgess , Harris County District Clerk , to file his motions, instruments, and pleadings

. This court’s mandamus jurisdiction is governed by section 22.221 of the
Government Code. A court of appeals may issue writs of mandamus against (1) a judge of a district , statutory county, statutory probate county, or county court in the court of appeals district; (2) a judge of a district court who is acting a s a magistrate at a court of inquiry under Chapter 52 Code of Criminal Procedure , in the court of appeals district; or (3) an associate judge of a district or county court appointed by a judge under Chapter 201 , Family Code , in the court of appeals distric t for the judge who appointed the associate judge. Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (b)

. The courts of appeals also may issue all writs necessary to enforce the court of appeals’ jurisdiction. Id

. § 22.221 (a)

. The Harris County District Clerk is not among the parties specified in section 22.221(b). See id. § 22.221 (b)

. Moreover, relator has not shown that the issuance of a writ compelling the requested relief is necessary to enforce our jurisdiction over a pending appeal

. See id. § 22.221(a). Ther efore, we lack jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against the Harris County District Clerk.
Accordingly, we dismiss relator’s petition for writ of mandamus for lack of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Spain, and Poissant.
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 17, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 102182]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-29770]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: December 17, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 2, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 861 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-579, K2025-578.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-29770 Filed 12-16-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
Ryan Anthony PLUMMER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-937

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed January 2, 2019

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and James A. Odell, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Keri T. Joseph, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SALTER, LOGUE, and SCALES, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

*754Based on the trial court's findings of fact after conducting a hearing where Appellant testified, Appellant's counsel was present, and the State was present, we affirm the trial court's denial of the Appellant's motion to withdraw his plea. *Sheppard v. State*, 17 So.3d 275, 287 (Fla. 2009).

Affirmed.
NO. 07-03-0309-CV

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL A

	AUGUST 8, 2003

	______________________________

	WARREN P. CANADY, APPELLANT

	V.

	TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, APPELLEE

	_________________________________

	FROM THE 320TH DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY;

	NO. 088254-00-D; HONORABLE DON EMERSON, JUDGE

	_______________________________

Before JOHNSON, C.J., and REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.

	MEMORANDUM OPINION

	Warren P. Canady, an inmate proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s order dismissing his claim against the Texas Department of Criminal Justice- Institutional Division for injuries he allegedly sustained.  Canady timely filed his notice of appeal on July 7, 2003.  By letter dated July 9, this Court notified Canady that no further action would be taken in this appeal until the $125 filing fee was received and that failure to pay the fee might result in dismissal under Rule 42.3(c) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.1  In response, on July 25, 2003, he filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis.  For the reasons expressed herein, we dismiss the appeal.

	Pursuant to Rule 20.1(a), a party may proceed without advance payment of costs if the party files an affidavit of indigence in compliance with the Rules.  Rule 20.1(c) provides that an affidavit of indigence must be filed in the trial court with or before the notice of appeal, and Rule 20.1(c)(3) further provides that the time in which to file the affidavit may be extended if, within 15 days after the date the notice of appeal was filed, the party files a motion for extension of time in compliance with Rule 10.5(b).  (Emphasis added).

	Canady’s application to proceed in forma pauperis was not filed in the trial court with or before the notice of appeal nor was it filed within the 15-day window with a motion for extension of time.  See Mikkilineni v. City of Houston, 4 S.W.3d 298, 299 (Tex.App.–Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, no pet.).  Thus, it is ineffective to excuse him from paying the filing fee.  

	Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

							Don H. Reavis

						    	     Justice
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 550 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 550

    Honoring the Sikh American community's celebration of Vaisakhi.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 10, 2014

  Mr. Garamendi (for himself, Ms. Chu, Mr. Valadao, Mr. Crowley, Mr. 
 Swalwell of California, Mr. Grijalva, Ms. Jackson Lee, Ms. Titus, Ms. 
 Lee of California, Ms. Speier, Mr. Holt, and Mr. Bera of California) 
submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee 
                   on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Honoring the Sikh American community's celebration of Vaisakhi.

Whereas Sikhism is a religion founded in the Punjab region of South Asia over 5 
        centuries ago and introduced to the United States in the 19th century;
Whereas Sikhism is the fifth largest world religion with approximately 
        25,000,000 adherents from diverse backgrounds throughout the world, 
        including 500,000 adherents in the United States;
Whereas Sikhs in the United States pursue diverse professions and walks of life, 
        making rich contributions to the economic vibrancy of the United States 
        as farmers, engineers, doctors, scientists, and business owners;
Whereas Sikh Americans continue to make strides toward securing religious 
        liberty as patriotic members of the United States Armed Forces;
Whereas Vaisakhi is one of the most religiously significant days in Sikh 
        history, commemorating the creation of the Khalsa, a fellowship of 
        devout Sikhs, by Guru Gobind Singh in 1699;
Whereas the Sikh religion is based on a belief in one God and the equality of 
        all human beings; and
Whereas the celebration of Vaisakhi includes performing Seva (selfless service), 
        such as providing free meals to all visitors to Sikh Gurdwaras (Houses 
        of Worship): Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives wishes the Sikh 
American community a joyous Vaisakhi.
                                 <all>
```
Technology
      Transfer Agreement

    


    Transferor
      (Party A): Xi’an
      Amorphous Alloy Science& Technology Co., Ltd.

    Transferee
      (Party B): Xi’an
      Amorphous Alloy Zhongxi Transformer Co., Ltd.

    


    Party
      A
      and Party B agreed through friendly negotiation and made this agreement as
      follows:

    1.Party
      A
      agreed to transfer a set of technology document which is the high-efficiency
      and
      energy-saving amorphous alloy distribution transformer (AMDT) to Party B,
      including:

    a.
      The
      series documents of SH11 three-phased oil-immersed AMDT: the technology drawing
      and procedure for 10,20,30,50,80,100,125,200,315,500,630kVA; 

    


    b.
      The
      series documents of DH11 single-phased oil-immersed AMDT: the technology drawing
      and procedure for 10,20,30,50,80,100kVA; 

    


    c.
      The
      winding mold drawing of the above series product;

    


    d.
      The
      series documents of S11-M.R three-phased oil-immersed coil AMDT: the technology
      drawing for 30,50, 80,100,160, 200,315,500,630,800,1600kVA;

    


    2.
      The
      technology transfer fees: RMB1,000,000.

    


    3.Upon
      the effective of this contract within one month, Party A shall hand over all
      the
      technology documents to Party B; Party B shall pay the full transfer fees to
      Party A before Dec. 31, 2004.

    


    4.
      After
      completion of the transfer, Party B shall possess the ownership of the above
      documents.

    


    5.The
      responsibility for violating the agreement: any Party which violate the
      agreement shall pay the damages for doubling of the transfer fees.

    


    6.
      Any
dispute
      arising in performing this contract, the two parties cannot settle this disputes
      through consultation or mediation, they are entitled to be settled according
      to
      judicial proceeding.

    


    7.
      This
      agreement has 2 originals, it shall be effective after signed and sealed by
      Party A and Party B.

    


    
      	
              Party
                A (seal) :

            	 	
              Party
                B (seal) :

            
	
              Representative
                :

            	 	
              Representative
                :

            
	
              Sep.
                02, 2004

            	 	
              Sep.
                02, 2004
NO. 07-11-0148-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO
PANEL A APRIL 28, 2011

__________________ ____________ THOMAS WYATT, APPELLANT
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

__________________ _______________ FROM THE 427 TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY; NO. D-1-DC-08-205299; HONOR ABLE JIM CORONADO, JUDGE

__________________ _____________ Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before this Court is Appellant ' s Motion to Dismiss Appeal in which he represents that after consultation with his attorney, he no longer wishes to pursue this appeal. As required by Rule 42.2(a) of th e Texas Rules of Appe llate Procedure, the motion is signed by Appellant an d his attorney. No decision of this Court having been delivered, the motion is grant ed and the appeal is dismissed. No motion for rehearing will be entertained and our m andate will issue forthwith.

Patrick A. Pirtle Justice Do not publish.